Discussion Title: Is it wrong to have a lockdown for Covid-19?

1. It is wrong to have a lockdown for Covid-19.
1.1. Pro: Lockdowns cause suffering and hardship to people due to the economic impacts they have.
1.1.1. Con: Lockdowns have changed the ways workers and companies conduct their business.
1.1.1.1. Pro: Workers are [motivated](https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+protest&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS802US802&oq=amazon+protest&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i64.11784j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) to improve their work conditions.
1.1.1.1.1. Pro: There has been a notable [trend](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/10/02/coronavirus-pandemic-demonstrations-protest-restrictions/) of protests across the world during 2020.
1.1.1.2. Pro: We need to keep one eye on the economy while being sensitive towards the safety of people.
1.1.1.3. Con: Lockdowns have also destroyed many [small businesses](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-coronavirus-has-decimated-small-business-but-entrepreneurship-has/).
1.1.1.3.1. Pro: Shutdown risk for small businesses as a result of Covid-19 lockdowns is higher for [smaller and youth-led firms](https://www.intracen.org/uploadedFiles/intracenorg/Content/Publications/ITCSMECO2020.pdf). \(p.32\)
1.1.1.3.2. Pro: Even if some businesses have considered the future, and begun thinking differently, they may not survive a lockdown.
1.1.1.4. Pro: Telehealth and remote work have increased. The rise in the acceptance of telehealth has lead to [increased access to healthcare](https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/during-pandemic-telehealth-visits-soar-10-week-300-group-practice).
1.1.1.4.1. Pro: There are many [benefits](https://www.cmswire.com/digital-workplace/6-proven-business-benefits-of-remote-work/) to remote work, including greater accessibility, reduced expenses for businesses, and increased productivity.
1.1.1.5. Con: Lockdowns have caused a drop in the [well-being of employees](https://theconversation.com/flexible-working-lessons-from-the-great-work-from-home-mass-experiment-152268). This, in turn, can cause a decline in productivity for many businesses.
1.1.1.5.1. Con: For some workers, [working from home](https://theconversation.com/flexible-working-lessons-from-the-great-work-from-home-mass-experiment-152268) increased productivity because they found themselves free of distractions that working from offices involved.
1.1.2. Con: A failure to lockdown can also have [economic consequences](https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/22/business/tyson-foods-china-coronavirus-intl-hnk/index.html).
1.1.2.1. Pro: Lower mortality rate at the cost of economic damage might not be preferable because it can cause a [significant reduction](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/et-commentary/economic-growth-does-impact-quality-of-life/articleshow/27878584.cms?from=mdr) in the quality of life.
1.1.3. Pro: Lockdowns increase [inequalities](https://theconversation.com/five-ways-coronavirus-lockdowns-increase-inequality-135767).
1.1.3.1. Pro: Lockdowns have increased the [unequal distribution of household duties](https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/covid-19-and-lockdowns) within families.
1.1.3.2. Pro: The [digital divide](http://www.ipsnews.net/2020/05/covid-19-digital-divide-grows-wider-amid-global-lockdown/) has been increased as a result of the lockdowns.
1.1.3.3. Pro: Lockdowns can increase [domestic violence](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/28/lockdowns-world-rise-domestic-violence).
1.1.3.4. Con: Lockdowns don't increase inequalities per se as the problem comes from [poor social protection](https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/supporting-livelihoods-during-the-covid-19-crisis-closing-the-gaps-in-safety-nets-17cbb92d/) from governments to vulnerable communities.
1.1.3.5. Pro: The lockdown has placed millions at r[isk from hunger](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/apr/21/millions-hang-by-a-thread-extreme-global-hunger-compounded-by-covid-19-coronavirus?fbclid=IwAR1LRh4zq_Cbh1N_xSN3xwoj9z-a_91xNE0hmYeR73XgHe_O6Abv81be3W0).
1.1.3.5.1. Pro: A [4% fall in the global per capita income is expected](https://feature.undp.org/coronavirus-vs-inequality/), pushing into extreme poverty between 40-60 million people especially in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.
1.1.3.5.2. Pro: Many [daily wage earners](https://kathmandupost.com/province-no-2/2020/04/18/families-of-daily-wage-earners-impoverished-dalit-communities-in-province-2-deprived-of-reliefs-even-after-three-weeks-of-nationwide-lockdown) have been unable to provide food for their families due to the lockdown.
1.1.3.5.3. Con: Governments have introduced [stimulus packages](https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-as-it-happened-us-senate-passes-480-billion-stimulus-package/a-53194342) to ensure that their citizens are not at risk due to hunger amid the lockdown.
1.1.3.5.3.1. Con: Groups that are not eligible for stimulus checks will be worse off during the lockdown.
1.1.3.5.3.1.1. Pro: In the [United States](https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/27/politics/undocumented-immigrants-coronavirus-stimulus/index.html), millions of undocumented workers are not eligible to benefit from the $2 trillion stimulus package.
1.1.3.5.3.2. Con: Many governments of developing countries have not been able to adequately provide for the poor in their countries, leaving them vulnerable to food and shelter-insecurity.
1.1.3.5.3.2.1. Pro: India's stimulus package [did not include](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-05-21/india-s-coronavirus-relief-package-is-the-right-size) direct payments to those suffering from poverty and starvation due to the pandemic.
1.1.3.5.3.2.2. Con: Where governments have not been able to provide for their people, international organizations have [stepped up](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/factsheet/2020/02/11/how-the-world-bank-group-is-helping-countries-with-covid-19-coronavirus) to offer relief.
1.1.3.5.3.2.2.1. Pro: The WHO is [supplementing](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/12/16/world-bank-signs-usd400-million-project-to-protect-india-s-poor-and-vulnerable-from-the-impact-of-covid-19) India's efforts to provide for the poor in a $400 million project.
1.1.3.5.3.2.2.2. Pro: The World Bank is [assisting](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/07/10/amid-multiple-crises-world-bank-group-refocuses-programs-and-increases-financing-to-74-billion-in-fiscal-year-2020) one hundred developing countries in fighting the effects of the pandemic.
1.1.3.5.3.2.2.2.1. Pro: The World Bank contributed [$43 billion](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/factsheet/2020/10/14/world-bank-covid-19-response) to help developing countries in their efforts to combat the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.
1.1.3.5.3.3. Pro: The EU has approved a [$2.2 trillion](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-11/here-s-why-the-stimulus-deal-is-such-a-big-deal-for-europe) stimulus package to provide economic support to its countries.
1.1.4. Pro: It is easier and more economically viable for the state to [selectively isolate](https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2020/06/18/medethics-2020-106336) the elderly and vulnerable instead of a general lockdown.
1.1.4.1. Con: Maintaining a general lockdown can result in a [faster lowering of the rate of infection](https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2020/09/01/lockdown-is-not-levelling-down/). This makes it more likely that restrictions can be eased faster for everyone, including the young, the elderly, and the vulnerable.
1.1.4.2. Con: It is [operationally impossible](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/29/shielding-impossible-coronavirus-testing-and-tracing) to isolate all those who are at risk from coming in contact with people from groups who are not at high-risk.
1.1.4.3. Con: Shielding the elderly and allowing the young to go out can be discriminatory. The [NHS Chief](https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3788?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_term=hootsuite&utm_content=sme&utm_campaign=usage) in the UK referred to this practice as a form of apartheid.
1.1.4.4. Pro: The under 50's with no comorbidities would, with relatively low risk, keep the world economy going while protecting those with higher risk.
1.1.4.4.1. Con: Society would become segregated between those who were or weren't in the vulnerable group. This would be quite divisive. Some would find it lonely too. At least we're all in the same boat at present.
1.1.4.4.2. Pro: With the average age of the workforce being [40ish this would help the economy greatly.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/996530/median-age-global-labor-force-years/#:~:text=This%20statistic%20depicts%20the%20median,global%20workforce%20was%2038.9%20years.)
1.1.5. Pro: The [direct and indirect economic consequences](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/may/06/millions-develop-tuberculosis-tb-covid-19-lockdown?fbclid=IwAR2rInAF4hP410zIH7Iji9NFJYio_B5rIu-Hb5s4RQV-jLGl3JuX6RRll1U) of the lockdown can kill more people than the pandemic itself.
1.1.5.1. Pro: The lockdown has resulted in mass unemployment, due to which many people are left destitute, particularly in countries that lack safety nets.
1.1.5.1.1. Pro: People are struggling to make money and support their family more than ever at this point. People should be able to go to work with precautions like gloves, masks, and face shields to reduce the spread while being able to provide for themselves.
1.1.5.1.2. Pro: In a globalized economy, the impacts of lockdowns in one country [impact](https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/coronavirus-pandemics-impact-on-the-global-economy-in-7-charts.html) the economic situation of other countries.
1.1.5.1.3. Con: A [lockdown](https://niti.gov.in/why-lockdown-best-strategy-india-fight-covid-19) in a populated country like India was necessary to save the lives and livelihood of the poor.
1.1.5.1.3.1. Con: Lockdowns have increased the divide between the rich and the poor in India. For example, school children who are well off [are able to access](https://www.ft.com/content/151a77dd-8a1a-4b32-9fb7-912eacd8e2b4) online learning while the \(impoverished\) majority cannot.
1.1.5.1.3.2. Pro: India announced in March 2020 a [package of $23bn](https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/3/26/india-unveils-23bn-package-to-help-poor-hit-by-covid-19-lockdown) to help more vulnerable people during the Covid-19 lockdown.
1.1.5.1.3.3. Con: The lockdown has put a [large number](https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/cnainsider/hunger-death-exploitation-plight-poor-poverty-india-covid-19-13618958) of people in India at risk of poverty due to the pandemic. For many, poverty is synonymous with starvation.
1.1.5.1.4. Pro: A [study](https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/africa%E2%80%99s-lockdown-dilemma) estimated that in 30 countries in sub-Saharan Africa only 6.8% of households could stay at home without profound damage to their health and welfare.
1.1.5.1.4.1. Pro: [Analysis](https://reliefweb.int/report/world/sub-saharan-africa-426-children-day-risk-death-hunger-following-impact-covid-19) from Save the Children in September 2020 found that nearly 426 children were at risk of dying from starvation due to the pandemic.
1.1.5.2. Pro: [Recessions](https://blogs.imf.org/2020/04/14/the-great-lockdown-worst-economic-downturn-since-the-great-depression/) resulting from lockdowns negatively impact public health and mortality.
1.1.5.2.1. Pro: Suicide rates rose by 15 percent in [Ireland](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/suicide-rate-rose-15-during-height-of-recession-1.2800500) during the last recession, and self harm rates rose by 30 percent.
1.1.5.3. Pro: Countries whose economies rely on tourism will suffer greatly under lockdowns.
1.1.5.3.1. Con: Losing jobs won't matter if everyone gets infected and dies. Health before jobs is for the sustainability of a nation.
1.1.5.3.2. Pro: In the first half of 2020, spending from tourism in Singapore fell by [39%.](https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/covid-19-singapore-q1-tourism-receipts-fell-39-harsher-impact-expected-q2-says-stb)
1.1.5.3.3. Pro: As of August 2020, nearly [100 million jobs](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2020/08/25/un-report-tourism-industry-covid-19-faces-1-trillion-loss-100-million-jobs-at-risk/?sh=7a7d4030cdd3) are at risk globally due to losses in the tourism industry.
1.1.6. Con: Lockdown is the only way we can flatten the curve. If more and more people keep interacting, then this will [result in increased rate of infections](https://lovindubai.com/coronavirus/spread-covid-19-uae).
1.1.6.1. Pro: Lockdowns and stay-at-home orders are effective in changing the [rate of hospitalizations](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766673) from a curve \(exponential function\) to a line \(linear function\).
1.1.6.1.1. Con: [Other things](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766673) that may reduce hospitalizations are economic insecurity and loss of health insurance.
1.1.6.2. Con: The data on which the [curve of infections](https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing) is based is not a reliable parameter on which lockdowns can be based. This is because the visible rate of infections is dependent on the rate of testing.
1.1.6.3. Pro: A [study](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2405-7) undertaken in 11 European countries showed that lockdowns were effective in reducing the transmission of the virus.
1.1.6.4. Con: In some contexts, [badly organized lockdowns](https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/the-virus-trains-how-unplanned-lockdown-chaos-spread-covid-19-across-india-120121600103_1.html) can increase the spread of the Covid-19.
1.1.6.4.1. Pro: By forcing people to travel vast distances, the [lockdown in India](https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/coronavirus-lockdown-india-covid-19-cases-deaths-6494930/) sped up the spread of the virus.
1.1.6.5. Pro: Infecting more of the population means that the absolute number of deaths caused by the pandemic will increase.
1.1.7. Pro: The economies of most countries have [suffered greatly](https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51706225) under lockdowns.
1.1.7.1. Pro: In [Pakistan](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/pakistan-says-no-more-lockdown-despite-surging-cases/1861142), the economic impacts of decreased revenues due to lockdown negatively impacted the lives of the poor. In April 2020, the Pakistani [Prime Minister](https://www.indiawrites.org/diplomacy/more-to-die-from-hunger-than-virus-in-lockdown-pakistan-pm/) reportedly said that continuing to enforcing lockdowns would be impractical because they would result in hunger and deprivation for the poor.
1.1.7.2. Con: Lockdowns mitigated the economic fallout that the pandemic would have otherwise caused.
1.1.7.2.1. Pro: Without lockdowns, the economic harms experienced by the UK's economy would have been [50-70%](https://voxeu.org/article/lockdowns-and-uk-economic-performance) greater.
1.1.7.2.2. Pro: A [study](https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/epidemiological-and-economic-effects-of-lockdown/) of the economic impacts of the lockdowns found that the lockdowns helped avoid larger business shutdowns and limited the damage inflicted to the economy by the pandemic.
1.1.7.2.3. Pro: Many experts have [determined](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/experts-think-the-economy-would-be-stronger-if-covid-19-lockdowns-had-been-more-aggressive/) that more aggressive lockdowns could have further reduced the harms to the US economy.
1.2. Pro: Lockdowns are detrimental to what is integral to our society: individual liberties.
1.2.1. Con: Individual liberty often justifies actions that harm others while [maximizing self-interest](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/lifting-lockdown-a-tragedy-of-the-commons/). Amidst a pandemic, this is unethical because it can entail suffering and loss of life.
1.2.1.1. Pro: Even essential liberties like habeas corpus may be [suspended in emergencies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus_in_the_United_States#Suspension_during_the_Civil_War), such as wartime.
1.2.1.2. Pro: We have a moral obligation to suspend certain individual liberties when they cause harm to others and to oneself. This is akin to the liberty of driving a bike without a helmet.
1.2.1.3. Con: This is symmetric. A lockdown is maximising the interests of the elderly while hurting the young and healthy. As such, it’s not unethical but merely a question of compromising to maximise overall value.
1.2.2. Con: The human desire is not always the best logical responder to problems. Liberty is integral to our societies but rules need to be established to keep our society going.
1.2.2.1. Pro: People may act on incorrect information, or may act with only [short-term interests](https://www.vox.com/2019/7/23/20702987/brain-psychology-making-hard-decisions) in mind. As a result, lockdowns help to counter these human tendencies.
1.2.3. Pro: Lockdowns can be used to validate [authoritarian](https://academic.oup.com/jlb/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jlb/lsaa064/5912724) measures by the state that limit freedom. This poses a threat to our democratic rights.
1.2.3.1. Pro: In October 2020, some German politicians complained that the [German government](https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-germany-democracy/a-55346478) has been unjustly restricting constitutional freedoms to pursue anti-pandemic measures.
1.2.3.2. Pro: In many countries, [lockdowns](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/world/australia/coronavirus-police-lockdowns.html) involved a violation of human rights because they were enforced through the excessive use of force.
1.2.3.2.1. Pro: In March 2020, security forces in [Kenya](https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/africa/100000007059869/police-crack-down-ahead-of-curfew-in-kenya.html) used tear gas and physical violence ahead of imposing a curfew.
1.2.3.2.2. Pro: In June 2020, [South Africa](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-protests-police-trfn-idUSKBN23G2QQ) reported instances where security forces brutally beat up people who violated the rules put in place to curb the pandemic.
1.2.3.2.3. Pro: Police violence in poor neighbourhoods in some countries was [exacerbated by the lockdown](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-safrica-protests-police-trfn-idUSKBN23G2QQ).
1.2.3.2.4. Pro: In July 2020, the [Zimbabwean](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/07/zimbabwe-authorities-must-drop-charges-against-health-care-workers-for-demanding-better-wages/) police arrested nurses and doctors protesting for salary hikes on grounds of violating lockdown rules.
1.2.3.2.5. Con: On 25th March 2020, the EU continued to renew its commitment to democracy through its [‘Action Plan Human on Rights and Democracy 2020-2024’](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_492).
1.2.3.3. Pro: In April 2020, the sweeping emergency laws pushed for by the [Cambodian](https://theconversation.com/cambodia-treason-trials-the-latest-in-the-countrys-slide-to-autocracy-151048) prime minister Hun Sen was described by [Amnesty International](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/04/cambodia-proposed-emergency-power-obliterate-human-rights/#:%7E:text=%20Cambodia%3A%20Proposed%20emergency%20powers%20would%20obliterate%20human,for%20disobeying%20or%20obstructing%20emergency%20measures%20More%20) as a grave threat to human rights.
1.2.3.4. Con: It is possible to sustain measures like lockdowns without harming [democratic rights](https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4088). Authoritarian measures do not discredit lockdowns but make it important that democratic institutions are strengthened alongside.
1.2.3.5. Pro: There are concerns that the apps used to track the spread of Covid-19 during the lockdown threaten our [right to privacy](https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-five-ways-some-states-have-used-the-pandemic-to-curtail-human-rights-and-democracy-151618).
1.2.4. Pro: Lockdowns are being generally applied to large heterogeneous geographic areas, without differentiating those areas based on local risk.
1.2.4.1. Con: Countries have now started to adopt [smart-lockdowns](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/06/lockdown-pakistan-target-500-coronavirus-hotspots-200623072202544.html) to target areas that might be the hotspots for the virus.
1.2.4.1.1. Pro: The UK has divided regions into ['tiers'](https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-tier-4-lockdown-announced-for-london-and-most-of-south-east-with-christmas-bubbles-cancelled-for-millions-12167367) in accordance with the risk of infection in specific regions.
1.2.4.2. Con: -> See 1.1.4.2.
1.2.4.3. Pro: Even if lockdowns are sometimes necessary, they are being imposed upon people in areas that do not need them.
1.2.4.3.1. Con: Areas where lockdowns are not necessary are usually reopened by the government.
1.2.4.3.1.1. Pro: In the majority of US states, [districts](https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2020/health/coronavirus-schools-reopening/) were able to decide for themselves if it was safe for schools to reopen.
1.2.5. Pro: In a free society, individuals have the right to make an independent, informed decision about whether or not they wish to isolate.
1.2.5.1. Con: The amount of background information needed to make an informed decision is too much for the average layperson.
1.2.5.2. Con: It is illogical to consider the choice to go outside during a pandemic an informed one, when no one can accurately consider what it would be like to have their life irreversibly altered or ended by contracting Covid-19.
1.2.6. Pro: Lockdowns have had a negative impact on the freedom of press.
1.2.6.1. Pro: Many countries have restricted or curbed [press freedom](https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-five-ways-some-states-have-used-the-pandemic-to-curtail-human-rights-and-democracy-151618) under the pretext of preventing the spread of false information concerning Covid-19.
1.2.6.1.1. Pro: Governments in [Cambodia](https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/04/29/cambodia-covid-19-spurs-bogus-fake-news-arrests), [China](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/16/citizen-journalist-facing-jail-in-china-for-wuhan-covid-reporting-zhang-zhan), and [Egypt](https://www.dw.com/en/egypt-arrests-journalist-on-fake-news-charges/a-53831530) used laws concerning the spread of false information to arrest journalists that were critical of state policies.
1.2.6.1.2. Pro: Reporters without Borders, an organization that closely observes developments concerning freedom of press, reported that pandemic emergency laws “[spell disaster for press freedom](https://rsf.org/en/news/covid-19-emergency-laws-spell-disaster-press-freedom)”.
1.2.6.1.3. Pro: The [Indian](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/world/asia/modi-india-press-media.html) government restricted press freedom by enforcing rules concerning Covid-related reporting.
1.3. Pro: Governments should strive to achieve herd immunity to tackle Covid-19.
1.3.1. Con: Until the efficacy of herd immunity is proven, governments should take the safer approach and enforce lockdowns.
1.3.2. Pro: Many countries opted for herd immunity instead of going through with lockdowns.
1.3.2.1. Con: Immunity to Covid-19 has been shown to be short lived making herd immunity [very hard](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02948-4), if not impossible to attain.
1.3.2.2. Con: [Russia](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/12/21/russias-response-to-the-coronavirus-the-2020-timeline-a72420), which had been [resisting locking-down](https://www.voanews.com/europe/russias-putin-says-no-lockdown-despite-spiking-covid-cases), was experiencing record high numbers of cases in December 2020. Authorities then capitulated and brought in limited lockdowns.
1.3.2.3. Pro: In March 2020, Britain wanted to [build herd immunity](https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/herd-immunity-why-britain-wants-60-of-its-population-to-contract-covid-19-6315745/) within its population.
1.3.2.3.1. Con: The UK had to [forgo herd immunity](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/coronavirus-pandemic-herd-immunity-uk-boris-johnson/608065/) due to its immense fallout and imposed its [first lockdown](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/23/boris-johnson-orders-uk-lockdown-to-be-enforced-by-police) in March 2020. In December 2020, the UK imposed its [fourth lockdown.](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2237475-covid-19-news-uk-reports-1041-daily-deaths-the-highest-since-april/)
1.3.2.4. Pro: The initial Swedish strategy was to curb transmission by achieving [herd immunity](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01098-x) without significant lockdowns and distancing measures.
1.3.2.4.1. Con: [Sweden](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/20/as-covid-death-toll-soars-ever-higher-sweden-wonders-who-to-blame) has faced incredibly high death tolls, as well as criticism from both internal and external sources for its strategy.
1.3.2.4.1.1. Pro: [6900 eminent scientists](https://www.johnsnowmemo.com/) signed the [John Snow Memorandum](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(20\)32153-X/fulltext) against herd immunity, the "old" laissez faire Swedish approach and similar policies of just letting Covid-19 spread unchecked.
1.3.2.5. Pro: Belarus did not impose a lockdown and had one of the [lowest number of deaths](https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3543) in Europe.
1.3.2.5.1. Con: [Belarus](https://belarusdigest.com/story/coronavirus-pandemic-in-belarus-many-times-more-cases-than-in-the-official-statistics/) is suspected to have many more cases and deaths than official statistics claim.
1.3.2.5.2. Con: The low number of deaths [are attributed to](https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3543) Belarus' large hospital capacity, early testing, and the self-isolation practiced by citizens - not to herd immunity.
1.3.3. Pro: Treatments and medications are now known and we can deal with Covid-19 better so a lockdown is not necessary.
1.3.3.1. Pro: A [randomised control study](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7456194/) of treatment with or without Calcifediol \(a vitamin D derivative\) reduced ICU admission from 50% of hospitalisations down to 2%.
1.3.3.2. Pro: Some clinical trials have found that [remdesivir](https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-exactly-where-were-at-with-vaccines-and-treatments-for-covid-19#Antivirals) has been successful in reducing the risk of death when one contracts Covid-19, and can reduce the length of hospitalisation.
1.3.3.2.1. Con: In November 2020 the WHO recommended [against](https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-recommends-against-the-use-of-remdesivir-in-covid-19-patients) the use of remdesevir in treating Covid-19 patients.
1.3.3.2.1.1. Con: The FDA [approved](https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4120) the use of remdesivir despite this recommendation, basing their approval off of three randomized trials that had more positive outcomes.
1.3.3.2.2. Con: A [study](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0243705) published in December 2020 was unable to conclusively demonstrate that remdesivir was effective against Covid-19.
1.3.3.2.3. Pro: A [study](https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764) published in November 2020 found that the median recovery time of patients who received remdesivir was 10 days compared to patients who received a placebo and recovered in 15 days.
1.3.3.3. Con: As of early December 2020, there is still [no cure](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-drugs-treatments.html) for Covid-19.
1.3.3.4. Con: Even if the medication were available, no country has the resources to deal with its entire population being infected in a short span of time.
1.3.3.4.1. Pro: Hospitals in the US were overwhelmed during the [first wave](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-11/u-s-health-care-system-was-totally-overwhelmed-by-coronavirus) and the [second wave](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-idUSKBN28W22L) of Covid-19 infections despite the lockdowns. This would have been much worse if no lockdown had occurred.
1.3.3.4.2. Pro: Despite a strict [lockdown](https://www.vox.com/2020/12/19/22190874/uk-lockdown-tier-4-boris-johnson), hospitals in the UK were [overwhelmed](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/hospitals-being-overwhelmed-by-new-covid-19-peak-uk-health-chiefs/articleshow/80011172.cms) by cases in December 2020, highlighting the inadequacy of resources.
1.3.3.5. Pro: [Convalescent plasma](https://www.hematology.org/covid-19/covid-19-and-convalescent-plasma) has been used to treat many patients with Covid-19.
1.3.3.5.1. Pro: In March 2020, the FDA [approved](https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m1256) the use of convalescent plasma.
1.3.3.5.1.1. Con: In September 2020, the [FDA concluded](https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3400) that there was insufficient evidence to approve the use of convalescent plasma therapy. The spokeperson for the FDA, who had greatly exaggerated its benefits, was fired for his misleading claims.
1.3.3.5.2. Con: The NHS [has not](https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/immune-based-therapy/blood-derived-products/convalescent-plasma/) officially formulated a stance regarding convalescent plasma therapy due to insufficient data.
1.3.3.5.3. Con: A [study](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2031304) published in November 2020 saw that there was no significant difference in mortality rates between Covid-19 patients who were and who were not treated with convalescent plasma.
1.3.3.6. Pro: An [early analysis](https://investor.lilly.com/news-releases/news-release-details/lillys-neutralizing-antibody-bamlanivimab-ly-cov555-receives-fda) found that patients treated with bamlanivimab were less likely to be hospitalized than those who were not treated with bamlanivimab.
1.3.3.6.1. Con: As of December 2020, the NIH has [not approved](https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/statement-on-bamlanivimab-eua/) the use of bamlanivimab due to insufficient data.
1.3.3.6.2. Con: The phase 3 trials for bamlanivimab were [paused](https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3985.short) due to safety concerns in October 2020.
1.3.4. Pro: Lockdowns don't allow for [herd immunity](https://theconversation.com/what-is-herd-immunity-and-how-many-people-need-to-be-vaccinated-to-protect-a-community-116355) to be created, which means that unless a global vaccination is found against Covid-19, lockdowns don't represent a long-term solution.
1.3.4.1. Con: Large amounts of funding have meant that [vaccines](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/08/how-has-a-covid-vaccine-been-developed-so-quickly) have been created, and are being distributed already.
1.3.4.1.1. Pro: As of December 2020, the first people received the [Pfizer/BioNTech](https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/health-officials-track-safety-covid-19-vaccines-roll-74767373) vaccine. This shows the vaccine is safe, and marks the beginning of vaccine rollouts across the world.
1.3.4.1.2. Pro: On 8 December 2020, the Pfizer vaccine was [administered](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55227325) for the first time in the UK.
1.3.5. Con: It is [unclear](https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-09-29/why-herd-immunity-cant-save-us-from-covid-19) whether natural immunity to Covid-19 exists.
1.3.5.1. Pro: -> See 1.3.2.1.
1.3.5.2. Con: As of November 2020, studies have shown that [natural immunity](https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/natural-immunity-covid-19-may-be-long-lasting) to Covid-19 appears to be long-lasting.
1.3.5.2.1. Con: The immune protection from Covid-19 [varies](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/covid-natural-immunity.html) depending on the severity of the infection, with those who are mildly infected only generating immune protection that lasts a few months.
1.3.5.3. Pro: Early reports showed that people who had caught Covid-19 once had become [reinfected](https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-reinfection-explainer/explainer-coronavirus-reappears-in-discharged-patients-raising-questions-in-containment-fight-idUKKCN20M124).
1.3.5.3.1. Con: Experts believe many examples of people getting reinfected were simply cases of [lingering infection.](https://time.com/5810454/coronavirus-immunity-reinfection/)
1.3.5.3.2. Con: There will always be a [small number](https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-catch-twice/) of people who catch a disease twice.
1.3.5.3.3. Pro: A man in the US was [reinfected](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099\(20\)30783-0/fulltext) with Covid-19, and tests showed this was a different strain of the virus, reducing the possibility of it having been the same infection.
1.4. Con: The lockdown gave nations time to respond.
1.4.1. Pro: Lockdowns are the simplest and most easily enforced tool available to the government.
1.4.1.1. Con: Lockdowns are [hard to enforce](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/much-of-europe-is-now-on-lockdown-but-can-authorities-actually-enforce-those-rules/2020/03/21/c4f04bae-6abd-11ea-b199-3a9799c54512_story.html) because of the mechanisms and resources they require.
1.4.1.1.1. Pro: Instead of strict enforcement, many countries have relied upon [advice and voluntary compliance](https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public) for lockdowns.
1.4.1.1.1.1. Con: Many police departments in the United States are not [enforcing](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/coronavirus-shutdowns-have-gone-nationwide-many-police-departments-arent-enforcing-them/2020/03/25/56be5ed2-6e00-11ea-a3ec-70d7479d83f0_story.html) lockdowns.
1.4.1.2. Con: Helpful, moral, ethical, or good advice needs to be given in a pandemic which is not always simple.
1.4.1.3. Pro: Humans struggle with [risk assessment.](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/reopening-psychological-morass/613858/?fbclid=IwAR3d2NbgiKFULmXBszN0GwmtqjkNMdo0K7JcpsFXSb-IPKm0THCjVmbXrYk)
1.4.1.4. Pro: A simple message allows brands to build on [public health messaging](https://www.thedrum.com/news/2020/03/26/stay-home-how-brands-are-building-governments-lockdown-efforts), which helps to ensure people understand the message.
1.4.1.4.1. Con: Lockdowns can be complicated by the [mixed messages](https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-government-giving-out-mixed-messages-over-lockdown-says-met-police-federation-11978825) of public authorities.
1.4.1.5. Con: Other measures such as closing shops and school can also be done instead of a lockdown. If people are advised by politicians to practice social distancing, then there is no need for a lockdown. For instance; leaders of [Japan](https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2020/04/japan-lockdown-coronavirus-covid-shinzo-abe) enforced rules during the pandemic and the people followed it, avoiding the need for a lockdown.
1.4.2. Con: This does not provide justification for repeated lockdowns, only the first such instance.
1.4.2.1. Pro: [Spain, Italy, France](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/coronavirus-europe-italy-second-wave-lockdown/2020/10/25/6c011306-16df-11eb-82db-60b15c874105_story.html) and other countries instituted second lockdowns, which cannot be justified by the need for time to prepare during the initial outbreak.
1.4.2.2. Con: The resources needed for each wave of infection [greatly outstrip](https://www.msf.org/new-approach-public-health-big-change-needed-fight-covid-19) the capacity in most countries. As a result, the need to buy time exists each time the number of cases increases rapidly.
1.4.3. Con: If governments already had proper healthcare systems, then the lockdown would have been unnecessary.
1.4.3.1. Pro: As many countries did not have a hygienic and stable healthcare system, a lockdown was proposed. But some countries like [Japan](https://www.newstatesman.com/world/asia/2020/04/japan-lockdown-coronavirus-covid-shinzo-abe) did not quarantine their city-states as they were already ready for the battle with the virus.
1.4.3.1.1. Con: Japan's success is thought to be [due to widespread mask-wearing](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/05/28/national/science-health/masks-helped-fight-coronavirus/?fbclid=IwAR2d8EJ2tDdwMP3eW8s0pqUzwO1_Ia80mLE52RyYoGQBgk10RNrK7jbslC8), rather than the healthcare system being better.
1.4.3.2. Con: Canada is considered to have the [best](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/slideshows/countries-with-the-most-well-developed-public-health-care-system?slide=11) healthcare system in the world. Yet, Canadian regions have had [multiple lockdowns.](https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/23/americas/toronto-coronavirus-lockdown-monday/index.html)
1.4.4. Pro: The time bought by lockdowns helped governments build resources to better respond to the damage caused by the virus.
1.4.4.1. Pro: Lockdown helped the Indian government [build essentials](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/covid-19-seven-ministries-to-set-up-quarantine-facilities/articleshow/74586054.cms) for healthcare and infrastructure to help in case there is surge in cases post lockdown.
1.4.4.1.1. Con: India's planning was ultimately [unsuccessful](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2020/07/02/how-well-is-india-responding-to-covid-19/), as their lockdown [persisted](https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/india-coronavirus-lockdown-extended-to-phase-4-here-is-looking-into-the-dates-of-all-the-lockdowns-uptil-now/585837) beyond the length of time initially planned.
1.4.4.1.1.1. Pro: In India, the lockdown had [adverse consequences](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7347396/) for the health and economic well-being of a very large section of the population.
1.4.4.1.2. Con: India's lockdown planning can be said to have failed since they have seen more than [20000 new cases](https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/india?country=~IND) a day since mid June 2020.
1.4.4.2. Pro: During [winter](https://theconversation.com/why-another-lockdown-might-be-needed-in-february-2021-151383), the rates of hospital admissions are higher. These rates are high especially among those with respiratory conditions who require the same resources that COVID-19 patients do. Without a lockdown, there wouldn't be sufficient resources to share.
1.4.5. Con: Despite the lockdown, the healthcare system of countries were overwhelmed. This shows that the lockdown was not effective in limiting the burden on resources.
1.4.5.1. Pro: The healthcare ICU systems in the UK were [overwhelmed](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/884682/2020-05-12_COVID-19_Press_Conference_Slides__7_.pdf) and at capacity in almost all areas in the UK between March and May 2020 \(p.10\)
1.4.5.2. Pro: In May 2020, ICUs in India were [overwhelmed](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/29/india-mumbai-hospitals-overwhelmed-coronavirus-cases) despite a lockdown.
1.4.5.3. Pro: Canada's healthcare system [was also](https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/analysis-in-midst-of-crisis-montreals-er-overcrowding-rears-ugly-head) overwhelmed in May 2020 despite a lockdown.
1.4.5.4. Con: Models of ICU utilization in the United States in a pandemic estimate that ICU utilization would [exceed 170%](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6819413/). In December 2020, when Covid-19 cases were at an [all-time high](https://www.forbes.com/sites/elanagross/2020/12/04/us-hits-all-time-high-of-217445-new-daily-coronavirus-cases-2879-deaths/?sh=2ea5136f4fb4), [less than 100%](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/12/09/us/covid-hospitals-icu-capacity.html) of ICU beds were being utilized.
1.4.5.5. Con: In some cases, where lockdowns were implemented, healthcare systems did not get overwhelmed.
1.4.5.5.1. Pro: As of December 2020, Australia, which had an [extremely strict lockdown](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/australia-covid-19-pandemic-lockdown-1.5813280) for three months following July 2020, has nearly no cases of Covid-19 infections.
1.4.5.6. Con: Countries that did not institute lockdowns were even more overwhelmed.
1.4.5.6.1. Pro: In the [Imperial County in California](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ez9M_GuYV0cFTfty5wxg75eh6niD8fFO/view?usp=sharing), the ICU Headroom is at 100% capacity right now, meaning they have no beds available.
1.4.5.6.2. Pro: The healthcare system in [Belgium](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54688846) was so overwhelmed that it kept it running by asking Covid-19 infected hospital staff to come to work.
1.4.5.6.3. Pro: [Switzerland](https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-11-swiss-alarm-icu-beds-covid.html) slowly imposed measures, but no proper lockdown; this has lead to all adult certified intensive care beds being occupied in November 2020.
1.4.5.6.3.1. Pro: As of December 2020, [Sweden](https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4833)'s ICU beds are nearing capacity, and they have not adopted a full lockdown.
1.4.6. Pro: By containing the spread of the virus, lockdowns delay the damage inflicted by the virus until such time as the vaccine can be developed and administered.
1.4.6.1. Con: Only [2 billion people](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03370-6) are expected to be vaccinated by the end of 2021. It could be much longer before the rest of the world is vaccinated, and as such, before lockdowns are lifted.
1.4.6.2. Pro: The vaccine for Covid-19 was successfully developed and has been rolled out in the [US](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55305720) and the [UK.](https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/07/uk-to-rollout-covid-vaccine-tuesday.html)
1.4.6.2.1. Con: Administering the vaccine has been [fraught with](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22213208/covid-19-vaccine-rollout-coronavirus-distribution) organizational and logistical problems in the US that have greatly delayed the rollout.
1.4.6.3. Pro: As of 1st January 2021, Israel [has vaccinated](https://www.timesofisrael.com/as-2021-dawns-israel-becomes-first-country-to-vaccinate-10-of-population/) 10% of its population.
1.5. Pro: Even if lockdowns are effective, the laws mandating a lockdown are wrong because they are unpopular/unwanted \(due to being restrictive\).
1.5.1. Pro: A lockdown through following procedures is not inherently wrong, as it's just following the [emergency laws](https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/commentary/constitutional-guide-emergency-powers) that grant special powers and restrictions to regular laws.
1.5.1.1. Pro: In the US, this applies to the [US Constitution](https://usconstitution.net/const.html), at both the federal \(i.e. ['shelter-in-place'](https://public.findlaw.com/coronavirus-laws/government-actions-during-a-pandemic/shelter-in-place-laws.html), the capabilities of [martial law](https://www.dailydot.com/debug/national-lockdown-martial-law/) and [branch](https://www.usa.gov/branches-of-government) roles\) under the [Public Health Service Act](https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/commentary/constitutional-guide-emergency-powers) and [state](https://www.kslaw.com/pages/covid-19-executive-orders) level \(i.e. 'stay-at-home'\).
1.5.1.2. Pro: The lockdown is due to following procedures written in laws due for a valid reason \(otherwise it wouldn't be there\). So it's not wrong if it's purposeful, it's just that they're written so long ago that we may not see the purpose and can't use it adequately until then.
1.5.2. Pro: The lockdown restricts [freedom of movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement), which is a human right.
1.5.2.1. Pro: According to [Article 13](https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/#:~:text=Article%2013.,to%20return%20to%20his%20country.) of the Universal Declaration of Human rights, all individuals possess the right to freedom of movement within each state.
1.5.2.2. Con: The [scale](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099\(20\)30243-7/fulltext) and [severity](https://www.mhlnews.com/covid19/article/21143651/new-report-illustrates-severity-of-covid19-impact-on-global-supply-chains) of the pandemic [justifies](https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/03/19/human-rights-dimensions-covid-19-response) curtailing this right.
1.5.3. Con: In the [UK](https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/may/01/uk-government-faces-legal-challenge-coronavirus-lockdown-businessman-simon-dolan), the lockdown is being legally challenged.
1.5.3.1. Con: The challenge in question has been [rejected](https://www.thenational.scot/news/uk-news/18912332.businessman-loses-court-appeal-challenge-covid-19-rules/) by every court it has been through, short of the UK Supreme Court, to which it is being appealed as of December 2020.
1.5.3.2. Con: Just because there are people challenging the law by thinking it's unconstitutional, doesn't automatically make it so.
1.6. Pro: Lockdowns have negative social impacts on people and society.
1.6.1. Pro: Economic hardships, ghettoisation, and empty city districts often fuel [vigilante movements and riots](https://theweek.com/articles/917687/call-coronavirus-riots).
1.6.1.1. Pro: [Gangs](http://oxfordpoliticalreview.com/2020/07/19/the-bizarre-role-of-gangs-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak/) across Latin America have risen in prominence, as they are the ones enforcing lockdowns and curfews.
1.6.2. Pro: Lockdowns have created a mental health epidemic.
1.6.2.1. Pro: Increased [loneliness](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/28/the-extreme-loneliness-of-lockdown-even-though-my-partner-is-here-im-struggling-to-cope) as a result of a lockdown can negatively affect mental health.
1.6.2.1.1. Pro: Loneliness as also been linked to the [risk of early death](https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/loneliness-early-death-risk-public-health-issue-mortality-pandemic-b575760.html).
1.6.2.1.2. Con: [Digital devices](https://www.goodthingsfoundation.org/news-and-blogs/blog/how-digital-can-help-those-experiencing-loneliness) were a very important tool to fight loneliness during the lockdown.
1.6.2.1.2.1. Con: Not everyone has the [means or knowledge to use technology](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic-digital-divide-internet-data-broadband-mobbile/) to access support.
1.6.2.1.3. Pro: Lockdowns lead to loneliness and stress. [Research](https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/06/social-distancing-and-immune-system) shows that one's immune response is suppressed when one feels lonely. Stress also leads to the production of hormones which can interfere with the function of immune cells.
1.6.2.1.4. Pro: Lockdowns reduce social interactions, a key ingredient to the happiness of a social species‘ individuals. It has been proven that those that live [long and healthy have good and long relationships](https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/the-secret-to-happiness-heres-some-advice-from-the-longest-running-study-on-happiness-2017100512543). Taking those away causes direct health impact to everyone, not just some as with Covid.
1.6.2.2. Con: It could be argued that a mental health epidemic could be [easier to treat or to cure](https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/what-is-mental-illness) than the harms caused by this global health pandemic.
1.6.2.2.1. Pro: If one is killed by Covid-19, then one's mental health can never be improved.
1.6.2.2.2. Con: A mental health epidemic will affect more people and will thus require more resources.
1.6.2.2.2.1. Pro: Less than [10%](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02598-6) of people infected by Covid-19's lungs will be damaged in the long run. In comparison, nearly [20%](https://www.healthline.com/health-news/people-with-covid-19-more-likely-to-develop-depression-anxiety-and-dementia) of people infected by Covid-19 are likely to develop mental health issues.
1.6.2.2.3. Pro: Covid-19 infection can lethally [affect the lungs](https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/what-coronavirus-does-to-the-lungs).
1.6.2.3. Pro: Many people have developed [eating disorders](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-54418913) or suffered creative burnouts as a result of lockdowns.
1.6.2.4. Pro: [Suicide](https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4352) rates are estimated to have increased as a result of the depression caused by the lockdowns.
1.6.2.4.1. Con: The article quotes a number significantly less than hundreds of thousands, i.e. an increase in suicides of about 2135 to 9570 per year.
1.6.2.4.2. Pro: Abusers have greater access to their abusee.
1.6.2.4.2.1. Con: This is not necessarily true. In cases where abusers and the abused are not isolating together, abusers may have more difficulty meeting the abused due to the lockdown.
1.6.2.4.3. Pro: The London Ambulance Service has reported that the rate of suicide and attempted suicide has risen by [68 percent](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-54740033) from 2019.
1.6.2.5. Con: The lockdown is an unprecedented situation for most people. Given time, people [will adjust](https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/traversing-the-inner-terrain/201612/how-we-normalize-the-outrageous) to it.
1.6.2.5.1. Con: One of the issues, as of December 2020, is that countries and regions keep going [in and out](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/third-lockdown-strictest-neil-ferguson-b1776210.html) of lockdowns, which disrupts peoples' ability to simply adjust to it.
1.6.2.6. Con: There are [several tested strategies](https://theconversation.com/six-evidenced-based-ways-to-look-after-your-mental-health-during-a-second-lockdown-149256) that people can now employ in order to deal with the emotional and mental fallout from the second lockdown.
1.6.2.6.1. Pro: [Technology](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smi.2975) can help people deal with the mental health fallout of Covid-19.
1.6.2.6.1.1. Pro: The popularity and use of tele-therapy has [increased dramatically](https://time.com/5883704/teletherapy-coronavirus/) during the pandemic.
1.6.2.6.2. Pro: Some governments have allocated [funding](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rishi-sunak-mental-health-funding-coronavirus-spending-review-b1759737.html) to reduce the impact of the pandemic on mental health.
1.6.2.6.2.1. Pro: France has instituted policies that require employers to protect the [mental health](https://www.proskauer.com/alert/the-french-government-response-to-the-covid-19-highlights-of-measures-taken) of workers.
1.6.2.6.2.2. Con: Of all the countries that included mental health support in their response plans in October 2020, only [17%](https://www.who.int/news/item/05-10-2020-covid-19-disrupting-mental-health-services-in-most-countries-who-survey) of them have set aside additional funding for this.
1.6.2.7. Pro: Lockdowns are a [significant source](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236465) of stress.
1.6.2.7.1. Con: Lockdowns can be sudden because they respond to the fluctuating rates of transmission. This can cause significant stress to people because they usually have little time to plan and organize.
1.6.2.7.2. Pro: People may not have had enough time to gather the necessary resources, such as food and water, for extended isolation.
1.6.2.7.3. Con: Researchers have been studying and devising ways in which people can [effectively cope with the stress](https://theconversation.com/why-living-in-the-future-rather-than-the-past-is-key-to-coping-with-lockdowns-new-research-151623) induced by lockdowns.
1.6.2.7.4. Con: A [study](https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/attitudes-to-uk-lockdown-rules.pdf) in London found that people found it easier to cope with the lockdowns that followed the first lockdown. This suggests that, with time, people adapt to the lockdowns and are less stressed.
1.6.2.7.5. Pro: A study found that men who worked from home are likely to end up [doing more](https://academic.oup.com/esr/article/32/6/752/2525493) overtime hours, adding to stress from overworking.
1.6.2.7.6. Pro: Due to traditional gender roles, lockdowns can disproportionately [increase stress](https://theconversation.com/return-of-the-1950s-housewife-how-to-stop-coronavirus-lockdown-reinforcing-sexist-gender-roles-134851) for women by increasing the amount of work they are expected to do.
1.6.2.8. Pro: In the UK, it is [estimated](https://www.mind.org.uk/media-a/5929/the-mental-health-emergency_a4_final.pdf) that two-thirds of adults with mental health issues reported a worsening of their condition during the lockdown.
1.6.2.8.1. Pro: Depression rates among young people have increased from [10.9% in July 2019 to 31% in June 2020.](https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/articles/coronavirusanddepressioninadultsgreatbritain/june2020)
1.6.2.9. Con: The impact of lockdown on mental health does not entail that they are wrong but that lockdowns should be mandated alongside measures to improve mental health.
1.6.2.9.1. Pro: People could be given access to online therapists to help ease the toll of lockdowns.
1.6.2.9.2. Pro: The promotion of material that encourages self-help and self-care practices could allow people to readily learn ways to help themselves.
1.6.2.9.3. Pro: There is evidence showing that [interventions in mental health](https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/en/promoting_mhh.pdf) through relevant programmes and policies are effective in increasing the mental well-being of populations. \(pg. 34\)
1.6.2.9.4. Con: Measures concerning mental health during the pandemic are likely to be ineffective in many instances. This is because it is very challenging to address, in the short-term, the socio-economic realities that [exacerbate mental issues](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01313-9).
1.6.2.10. Con: Some people have found that their mental health has [improved](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/29/coronavirus-lockdown-anxiety-mental-health) during lockdowns.
1.6.2.10.1. Con: People will also face additional mental health struggles when countries come out of lockdown.
1.6.2.10.1.1. Pro: Children are also more likely to experience [depression and anxiety post-lockdown](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/lockdown-children-mental-health-depression-anxiety-loneliness-study-university-bath-a9541801.html).
1.6.2.10.1.2. Pro: Those with [social anxiety](https://www.3ts.ie/blog/managing-social-anxiety-post-lockdown/) will also suffer post-lockdown.
1.6.2.10.1.3. Con: Many people will be able to travel post-lockdown, which can lead to [happiness](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/11-reasons-why-travel-makes-you-a-happier-person_b_6908918).
1.6.2.10.1.3.1. Con: The serious mental health issues caused by the lockdowns will not be [sufficiently combatted](https://www.ted.com/talks/andrew_solomon_depression_the_secret_we_share/transcript?language=en) by things which provide short term happiness.
1.6.2.10.2. Pro: Some young people felt more connected to school, and [less anxious](https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-08/uob-rry082120.php), during lockdown.
1.6.2.10.3. Con: The impact of the lockdown on mental health was disproportionately negative. While some saw improvements, many people from [vulnerable and marginalized groups](https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/blogs/emerging-evidence-on-covid-19s-impact-on-mental-health-and-health) saw a severe decline in mental health.
1.6.2.10.3.1. Pro: A [study in the UK](https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/blogs/emerging-evidence-on-covid-19s-impact-on-mental-health-and-health) showed that people belonging to lower socio-economic groups were more likely to experience suicidal thoughts compared to those in higher socio-economic groups.
1.6.2.10.3.2. Pro: In the UK, [rates of depression among adults](https://www.healtheuropa.eu/mental-health-funding-urgently-needed-as-uk-suicides-increase/103728/) doubled during the pandemic.
1.6.2.10.3.3. Pro: The lockdowns have had a negative impact on the mental health of people with [neurodevelopmental conditions](https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/neurodiversity-the-impact-of-lockdown-and-social-isolation/).
1.6.2.10.4. Pro: Lockdowns can help [lessen people’s concerns](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200604095624.htm) about the pandemic and the threats it poses.
1.6.2.10.4.1. Pro: A [study](https://theconversation.com/wellbeing-levels-fell-during-the-pandemic-but-improved-under-lockdown-data-analysis-shows-143367) found that well-being among some people fell at the beginning of the pandemic but rose during the lockdown.
1.6.2.10.4.2. Pro: Among some groups, the lockdowns saw a [reduction in the rate of suicides](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/14/japan-suicides-fall-sharply-as-covid-19-lockdown-causes-shift-in-stress-factors).
1.6.3. Pro: Lockdowns exacerbate other social and medical issues that can also put people's lives at risk.
1.6.3.1. Pro: [Neglect in care homes](https://www.barkinganddagenhampost.co.uk/news/health/chestnut-court-accused-of-neglect-1-6597087), exacerbated by lockdown, is causing a greater incidence of death.
1.6.3.2. Pro: In many places, lockdowns have had a negative [impact on gender equality](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/lockdowns-gender-roles/).
1.6.3.2.1. Pro: Lockdowns have been shown to increase the proportion of [household work](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-020-01258-z) that women engage in.
1.6.3.2.1.1. Pro: A [German study](https://www.dw.com/en/germany-flexible-working-conditions-lead-to-overtime-study-shows/a-47771436) has shown that when women work from home, they tend to do more hours of childcare work than women who do not work from home.
1.6.3.2.1.2. Pro: The [care burden](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-55016842) faced by women runs the risk of setting back gains women have made for equality.
1.6.3.2.2. Con: In some contexts, the lockdowns helped further the cause of gender equality by [reversing traditional gender roles](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/lockdowns-gender-roles/) concerning parenting and household work.
1.6.3.2.3. Pro: Lockdowns have increased [gender-based violence](https://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/stories/2020/11/5fbd2e774/gender-based-violence-rise-during-lockdowns.html) against women.
1.6.3.2.3.1. Pro: Lockdowns have increased [domestic violence](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-53014211) globally, and the victims of this violence are predominantly women.
1.6.3.3. Pro: Lockdowns have had a negative impact on health because of the reduced availability of medical services.
1.6.3.3.1. Pro: During the first lockdown, thousands of [cancer](https://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2020/06/01/impact-of-coronavirus-on-cancer-services-revealed-over-2-million-people-waiting-for-screening-tests-and-treatments/) cases went untreated and undiagnosed.
1.6.3.3.2. Pro: During the lockdown, the number of people diagnosed with [diabetes](https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/first-covid-lockdown-had-major-impact-on-type-2-diabetes-diagnosis-and-monitoring/) reduced due to decreased access to testing centers. This is likely to delay the treatment of diabetes and result in negative long-term consequences.
1.6.3.4. Pro: People are [unwilling to request](http://www.bu.edu/articles/2020/coronavirus-update-04-24-2020/) medical assistance due to fear of getting COVID-19.
1.6.4. Con: A [study](https://www.leedstrinity.ac.uk/news/archive/2020/covid-19-study-reveals-positive-impact-of-lockdown-on-family-dynamics-and-wellbeing.php) in July 2020 found that the lockdown has had a positive impact on family dynamics and well-being in the UK.
1.6.4.1. Con: In the US, low income families are finding the pandemic incredibly difficult, with fears raised for child development due to fighting at home, on account of economic instability caused by lockdowns \([p. 17](https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/BFI_WP_2020143.pdf)\).
1.6.5. Con: The lockdown encouraged people to take up [more hobbies](https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2020/04/20/the-unexpected-joy-of-taking-up-new-hobbies-during-the-covid-19-lockdown.html), which have been a [positive addition](https://www.positive.news/society/how-hobbies-helped-people-stay-positive-during-lockdown/) to the lives of many people.
1.6.5.1. Con: The push towards self-improvement in the midst of the pandemic has created a culture where time spent not doing so is seen as [wasted](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/24/productivity-in-coronavirus-lockdown).
1.6.5.2. Pro: The types of hobbies people have taken up during lockdown bring with them a feeling of '[being in the moment](https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/how-new-hobbies-help-ease-the-stress-of-difficult-times-1.4315790)', and can have positive mental health impacts.
1.7. Con: Lockdowns are effective in reducing the number of deaths.
1.7.1. Con: A lockdown is a gamble on a vaccine or an effective treatment becoming available in a short timeframe. If this doesn't happen, a lockdown only can only succeed in delaying inevitable deaths, [not in preventing them](https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/does-lockdown-really-decrease-covid-deaths).
1.7.1.1. Con: Lockdowns were used to [buy time](https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/03-03-2020-shortage-of-personal-protective-equipment-endangering-health-workers-worldwide) for the [manufacturing and distribution of PPE](https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d06060b7-3bed-4edc-b5a0-a34751466db2)s \(masks, etc.\), not for waiting for a vaccine.
1.7.1.1.1. Con: A year later, even though PPE is readily available, lockdowns continue to be enforced.
1.7.2. Con: Young, healthy people are at a [lower risk](https://www.webmd.com/lung/whos-at-risk-covid-19#1) of being infected or seriously harmed by Covid-19. Thus, only those who are meaningfully at risk i.e. the old and frail, should be required to isolate themselves from others.
1.7.2.1. Con: Although they themselves are low risk, [young people can get Covid-19](https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-and-covid-19-younger-adults-are-at-risk-too#:~:text=Can%20young%20people%20get%20coronavirus,high%20blood%20pressure%20\(hypertension\).) and pass it on to high-risk people.
1.7.2.1.1. Pro: More recent data shows that [38%](https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-and-covid-19-younger-adults-are-at-risk-too) of Covid-19 patients who needed hospitalization were between 20 - 54 years old.
1.7.2.1.1.1. Pro: According to the same source, half of patients that needed ICU care were under 65 years of age.
1.7.2.1.2. Pro: The new Covid variant \([SARS-CoV-2 VOC202012/01](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variant_of_Concern_202012/01) or B117\) [spreads more quickly](https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/science-and-technology/new-strain-variant-covid-19-coronavirus-lockdown-schools) within the population.
1.7.2.1.2.1. Pro: B117 could potentially change the [R0-value](https://www.healthline.com/health/r-nought-reproduction-number) from [0.9 to 1.6.](https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/science-and-technology/new-strain-variant-covid-19-coronavirus-lockdown-schools)
1.7.2.1.2.2. Con: The new variant [is not](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600\(21\)00005-9/fulltext) more severe than the original and it does not have a higher mortality rate. This means that there is no need for added concern.
1.7.2.1.2.2.1. Con: -> See 1.1.6.5.
1.7.2.2. Pro: As of [December 2020,](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033350620302092?via%3Dihub) the death rate from [Covid-19 infection](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099\(20\)30243-7/fulltext) is 0.5 percent among 50 to 69-year-olds and above 5 percent among those over-70s.
1.7.2.3. Con: Younger adults are [dying](https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/05/health/young-people-dying-coronavirus-sanjay-gupta/index.html) from Covid-19.
1.7.2.3.1. Con: The fact remains the average age of Covid-19 patients in Italy/UK is about [80 years](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says).
1.7.2.3.2. Pro: In relative terms, Covid-19 is still [riskier](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/08/covid-deaths-34-times-higher-than-flu-and-pneumonia-ons-data) than some other viral diseases such as the flu or pneumonia as it has a higher mortality rate.
1.7.2.3.3. Pro: While the relative risk is lower for young adults, the absolute number of deaths of young adults from Covid-19 are [high enough](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/opinion/covid-deaths-young-adults.html) to merit concern.
1.7.2.4. Pro: The [socialization of children](https://childrenscampus.com/blog/importance-socialization-kids/) is critically important to their development. Schools should be able to open up sooner than other services.
1.7.2.4.1. Con: Children can be socialized at home where their lives and health are not threatened.
1.7.2.5. Con: Even if there is a relatively lower risk of mortality for younger people, they are still at risk of developing [Long Covid](https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4470) that can have long-term serious consequences.
1.7.2.5.1. Pro: A [study](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916) of 100 German patients found that most had cardiac involvement and ongoing myocardial inflammation independent of preexisting conditions and Covid-19 severity. The average age of these patients was 49 years.
1.7.2.6. Con: Even though younger people are at a lower risk of dying of Covid-19, [many of them will require hospitalization](https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/science-and-technology/2020/07/how-scientists-know-covid-19-is-way-deadlier-than-the-flu) at a time hospitals are likely to be overwhelmed by the elderly.
1.7.2.6.1. Pro: [Long-term health effects](https://www.vox.com/2020/5/8/21251899/coronavirus-long-term-effects-symptoms) are still a strong area of research for more than mild cases of Covid-19 infections.
1.7.2.7. Pro: The average age of those who are most at risk of death from Covid-19 is [higher than](https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/) the average life expectancy in countries hit by Covid-19. Thus, only a small part of the population of most countries would need to isolate under this model.
1.7.3. Con: The incidence of death from Covid-19 infections is not significant enough to justify a lockdown.
1.7.3.1. Con: Lockdown is necessary to prevent Covid-19 from surpassing the number of lives lost to drowning since the [main transmission factor of Covid-19 is face-to-face contact within 1 meter and for more than 15 minutes and direct physical contact](https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200326-sitrep-66-covid-19.pdf?sfvrsn=9e5b8b48_2). The transmission distance is very small and daily crowds would violate that limit if we do not establish a lockdown. [Most countries saw a decrease after non-essential production has stopped.](https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-europe-lockdown-effectiveness-graphics/)
1.7.3.1.1. Con: Nothing in that link demonstrates case or death containment by lockdown. It merely shows the epidemic curves and the dates of social-distancing and lockdown measures. Correlation does not equal causation.
1.7.3.2. Con: Models suggest that without the lockdown the number of deaths would be [significantly higher](http://news.sky.com).
1.7.3.2.1. Con: That link itself cites the actual deaths on logarithmic epidemiological arcs, which don't seem to change their parabola after lockdown. Surely if these lockdowns were effective we could find several arcs where it clearly gets hampered.
1.7.3.3. Pro: As of December 2020, the [death rate](https://bing.com/covid/local/unitedstates?form=COVD07) for those with Covid-19 is approximately 2.18 percent in the US.
1.7.4. Pro: -> See 1.1.6.
1.7.5. Con: A lockdown can be considered an exaggeration for people where it creates a [crying wolf situation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cry_Wolf) for them. Next time, those people would be more reluctant to respond to crises when they arise, thereby increasing the extent of the damage created by them.
1.7.5.1. Con: It cannot be called a crying wolf situation when [over a million people are dead](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-toll/) already.
1.7.5.1.1. Con: A million is a tiny amount. It's approximately 0.000128% of the [total population](https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#:~:text=7.8%20Billion%20\(2021\),currently%20living\)%20of%20the%20world.), and so is not a [significant threat](https://app.flourish.studio/visualisation/3024207/) to humanity.
1.7.5.2. Pro: If a disease with a higher death rate were to circulate, and public opinion was against lockdowns as a concept, even more death could result.
1.7.6. Pro: Studies have shown that lockdowns successfully reduce the number of deaths from Covid-19.
1.7.6.1. Pro: A [study](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2404-8#change-history) based on data from 1700 local, regional and national non-pharmaceutical across 6 big countries showed that lockdowns are an effective strategy for slowing the spread of Covid-19.
1.7.6.2. Con: There has been a [lack of observed statistical difference in the rates of death](https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/lockdowns-could-kill-more-people-than-covid-19/) for countries that have and have not locked down Thus, it is wrong to have an unnecessary lockdown for Covid-19.
1.7.6.2.1. Con: Some places like [Spain](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/10/06/world/covid-coronavirus/two-more-spanish-cities-announce-lockdown-orders-as-a-second-wave-of-cases-spreads-beyond-the-capital) were experiencing a second wave of Covid-19 related deaths in October 2020, which has forced the government to implement lockdowns in certain cities.
1.7.6.2.2. Con: The main reason for lockdowns is preventing the situation getting out of control - that is when you will see significantly higher mortality rates, not while things are still under control.
1.7.6.3. Pro: In the UK, lockdown may have [saved 400k lives](https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/uncategorised/lockdown-stopped-470k-covid-19-deaths-in-uk-say-researchers/) as of summer 2020.
1.7.7. Pro: In countries where a lockdown has been instituted, the number of infections was reduced and contained for as long as the lockdown remained in effect.
1.7.7.1. Pro: Melbourne's lockdown was [effective](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54654646) in reducing the amount of new infections from 700 to 0 per day.
1.7.7.1.1. Pro: As of November 2020, [Melbourne](https://www.vox.com/2020/12/4/22151242/melbourne-victoria-australia-covid-19-cases-lockdown) has seen no active cases for four weeks.
1.7.7.2. Pro: The March lockdowns in Europe have been successful in drastically reducing the number of new Covid-19 infections across multiple countries like [Spain](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/spain/), [United Kingdom](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/), [Italy](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/), and [Ireland](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/ireland/).
1.7.7.3. Con: China has a history of concealing data and so the numbers may be unreliable. The first doctor to draw attention to Covid-19, [Li Wenliang](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51403795), died and some go so far as to deem his death suspicious.
1.7.7.3.1. Con: China's unreliable reporting does not impact the successes of lockdowns seen elsewhere.
1.7.7.4. Pro: The Wuhan lockdown showed it can [be very effective](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1090007/china-confirmed-and-suspected-wuhan-coronavirus-cases-region/). Hubei lost 4,000+ people whilst the next worst-hit province was less than 25 deaths.